you're probably better off going to b-school (unless you can do 170/NU like someone mentioned above). with a 160, you can almost certainly prep to a 700+ GMAT score unless you just absolutely suck at math. your WE will help much more for b-school admissions than law school admissions, and b-schools don't care nearly as much about GPA. with a 700+GMAT, I bet you'd get into a T10 program.

I want to practice personal injury, I know most people think down on it, however while I have always conducted myself with the up most integrity in my claims sometimes having to argue my position to upper management, I have seen other insurance companies (co-defense) act egregiously. I feel the need to protect people from these practices, I know strategy, value, and am a good negotiator. I have seen some amazing trials, and have absorbed what I have learned from some really good trial attorneys.

I need to stay in my venue post law school. I have a lot of contacts here, know the law, how to win in certain situations, and understand the legal environment. I could easily pull a job post law school in a mid to large plaintiff firm, but that would be second best then my own practice. Their are about 5 superb trial attorneys I know, that I would stall my own practice to work with them if they would hire me however it would be hard to get in with them.

Thinking this through it might be best to stay in state to ensure I maintain my relationships, join professional groups in law school, social contacts, clubs etc. Thank you, everyone.

Maximillian wrote:I want to practice personal injury, I know most people think down on it, however while I have always conducted myself with the up most integrity in my claims sometimes having to argue my position to upper management, I have seen other insurance companies (co-defense) act egregiously. I feel the need to protect people from these practices, I know strategy, value, and am a good negotiator. I have seen some amazing trials, and have absorbed what I have learned from some really good trial attorneys.

I need to stay in my venue post law school. I have a lot of contacts here, know the law, how to win in certain situations, and understand the legal environment. I could easily pull a job post law school in a mid to large plaintiff firm, but that would be second best then my own practice. Their are about 5 superb trial attorneys I know, that I would stall my own practice to work with them if they would hire me however it would be hard to get in with them.

Yeah I could go to business school, but frankly I do not want to work for a big corporation forever. Thinking this through it might be best to stay in state to ensure I maintain my relationships, join professional groups, etc.

I'm going to try this on the off chance you can be convinced otherwise.

Okay, let's get the basics out of the way. I had significant experience in claims prior to LS (a little more than you do right now). I did most of my work on the PD side of claims, but I had some experience with the BI side.

I'm guessing you're working the auto segment because that's the only insurance segment left which should give you the kind of volume you're talking about. I'm not sure what being a good negotiator has to do with anything as the major carriers are shifting their resources to software like colossus and claims decision point. My guess is that within a decade the entire industry will be using something like what two of the big carriers are already using. We both know the room to create value through negotiation is disappearing in personal injury work. Personal injury work has, for the most part, been reduced to a volume game for both the insurance companies and the plaintiff's lawyers.

On the off chance you are in Texas, personal injury is not the place to be. The last frontier of tort reform has been conquered in Texas and it will all but destroy PI work in Texas (what was left of it). The Texas Supreme Court just ruled that charged meds may not be introduced into evidence and that only actual, paid meds may be introduced into evidence. We both know that that will lower jury verdicts as $18k in medical bills doesn't sound nearly as bad as $100k in medical bills. Lower jury verdicts = lower settlements. If you aren't in Texas, odds are this type of tort reform is coming to your jurisdiction in the near future.

The problem with your strategy is that you are closing off future options way too early in the game. Combining your WE with kick-ass performance at a respectable law school will open up some decent options for you down the road. Choosing a LS based on the limited goal of pursuing PI is very risky. Proceed with caution.

I understand needing to stay in your current location but I would encourage you to reevaluate just how true that is. I get that you might have kids and a family and that makes is nearly impossible to move. If that isn't a factor, you really should retake and try to shoot for something like NU. I know it's hard to understand just how important prestige is in the legal industry. Please just trust me that it matters more than you can grasp as this point.

As for networking your way into a good position, I wouldn't count on it. While networking is important and plays a significant role in hiring, it is not a suitable replacement strategy for attending a better school.

LS has worked out really well for me, but if I had to do it over again, my approach would be as follows: First, aim for T-14 or and the school with the strongest job placement in the market you want to practice in. Second, balance that against the relative debt loads of the schools you are considering. Under no circumstances should you consider attending a T2 school at sticker financed with student loans.

Disregard all of this if you work for a commercial carrier (I mean a real commercial carrier, I am not talking about some experience working commercial claims for the Gecko or Flo). If you have real commercial experience and have a guaranteed job with a PI firm that exclusively handles commercial claims it might be worth taking a shot at PI work (you know the type of firm I'm talking about; a firm that doesn't advertise, works exclusively off of referrals and doesn't touch personal auto work).

I am in a really liberal state, where much of our state supreme court is ex pi or trial lawyers like wrongful termination. I am not concerned with tort reform whatsoever here as the plaintiff bar is very strong, the legislature has a lot of pi attorneys, and the population in general would not go for it. Verdicts are much stronger than Texas, even Houston which I understand as a more liberal Texas venue. I have some very limited experience with some southwest states, which settle or trier of fact finds at 1/4-1/3 of what my states value. Even the parts of my state that are politically conservative (which is slim) are very generous on damages.

Sorry about the double post, and thank you mouse for your post, I really appreciate the feedback and it does give me things to consider.

Maximillian wrote:I am in a really liberal state, where much of our state supreme court is ex pi or trial lawyers like wrongful termination. I am not concerned with tort reform whatsoever here as the plaintiff bar is very strong, the legislature has a lot of pi attorneys, and the population in general would not go for it. Verdicts are much stronger than Texas, even Houston which I understand as a more liberal Texas venue. I have some very limited experience with some southwest states, which settle or trier of fact finds at 1/4-1/3 of what my states value.

We live in a time when antiunion legislation was able to get through the legislative process in Wisconsin (Wisconsin!). Even if we assume it wasn't legit for procedural reasons, the fact that it even got that close in Wisconsin should tell you that nothing is untouchable, even in the most liberal of states.

The pressure for tort reform has nothing to do with the relative strength of the plaintiff's bar or who sits on the state supreme court. It comes from the business community putting pressure on legislators through lobbying efforts and the electorate. If that type of pressure can be created in a place like Wisconsin, it can happen in any state.

I am not telling you that you should not pursue your dreams and desires of doing PI work. What I am saying is that quitting your current job, putting all your eggs in the PI basket, and then making a go at PI work carries a lot of risk.

1. I have a fairly decent idea of what you currently make given your job title. If you're serious about pursuing PI work, odds are that it will take you three to five years in practice just to get back to your pre-LS salary (and don't even think about benefits).

2. To make money doing plaintiff's side work you'll need either volume or high exposure claims. The first is tough to generate and is why mid to large size PI firms exist. Once those firms establish a reputation, it becomes easier to generate business. Once you're a student and talk to attorneys that work at those types of firms you'll realize the name of the game is settling claims as quickly as possible for as much as possible. Similar to what you do right now, time and volume will still be a major part of your objectives, only instead of trying to settle for the lowest acceptable amount, you're trying to settle for the highest possible amount. You'll also realize that mid to large size PI firms are just a different side of the coin from the insurance guys. High exposure claims are nearly impossible to land, especially for someone who is just starting out (I'm sure you've noticed that most of the truly high exposure cases in your legal community are most likely represented by the same handful of lawyers).

Additionally, your postings talk about the value you can add from your trial experience. I understand why you believe this creates value, and on some level it does. But you also have to remember that you are usually staffed on a claim because it is going to trial (unless you're really in an ARBI-type role). Even the most established PI attorneys don't go to court on most of their claims. So while your skill set is solid, it won't come into play with the vast majority of claims you handle. Your skill set would add value doing ID work because ID lawyers are usually staffed because everybody else failed to settle the claim.

3. If you do pursue PI work coming out of school, you'll burn yourself on the insurance side of the business. I know people snicker at ID just as much as PI work, but in-house ID positions are actually pretty awesome jobs (mid six figures with nice schedules and job stability). In your position, knowing what I now know, if I were looking to get into the injury game after LS, I would be trying to position myself for an in-house, ID position.

4. We haven't even talked about student debt.

There are many more reasons why you should think about what you are doing. Your best bet is to keep options open, not foreclose them simply because one school may be "good enough" for one particular option. Keep PI as a primary goal, but make sure you are keeping other options open.

Maximillian wrote:I agree most attorneys do not go to trial on a regular basis, but there are about 5 or so in my market that land the 10mil cases and up consistently and they do go to trial on a regular basis because frankly they are very good. Only one of them went to what is considered a "good school" T14 or so, others went to what would be considered barely in the top 100. While no one wins every time, these people win much more often then lose and that is why they land those cases. I have been opposite them, and they are really exceptional people.

I will probably put apps in at the some of the remaining schools in the top 50 that gave me fee waivers at this point.

Where someone went 20 years ago to school isn't the same as now. It's not even the same as ten years ago. Also, you need to strongly recognize the fact that you will most likely NOT be one of the attorneys settling big claims.